Are there times when dropping WMD on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified

[enhanced_deficit]

Are there times when dropping WMDs on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified?

This news today prompted me to think up above Q.

[h=1]Japan Marks 68th Anniversary of Hiroshima Bombing[/h] By AP / Shizuo Kambayashi
Aug. 05, 2013

Shizuo Kambayashi / APJapanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, third from left, accompanied by Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum Director Kenji Shiga, left, looks at a diorama of Hiroshima city after the Aug. 6, 1945 atomic bombing, at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum in Hiroshima, western Japan, Aug. 6, 2013




(HIROSHIMA, Japan) — Japan marked the 68th anniversary Tuesday of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima with a somber ceremony to honor the dead and pledges to seek to eliminate nuclear weapons.
Some 50,000 people stood for a minute of silence in Hiroshima’s peace park near the epicenter of the early morning blast on Aug. 6, 1945, that killed up to 140,000 people. The bombing of Nagasaki three days later killed tens of thousands more, prompting Japan’s surrender to the World War II Allies.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, among many dignitaries attending the event, said that as the sole country to face nuclear attack, Japan has the duty to seek to wipe out nuclear weapons.

The anniversary comes as Japan is torn over restarting nuclear power plants shut down since the massive


Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/08/05/japan-marks-68th-anniversary-of-hiroshima-bombing

 

[BuddyRey]

It's better for a hundred bad guys to go free than for one innocent person to be killed needlessly, IMO.

 

[pcosmar]

Voted no.

But there are many who attempt to justify it.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Are there times when dropping WMDs on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified?

Are you defending yourself against aggression? Are the people who are for some reason labeled "civilians" responsible for the aggression? Did the "civilians" elect aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" voluntarily act as informants in support of the aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" provide financial support to the aggressive leaders? Do they pay taxes? If the answers are "yes", then what makes the "civilians" "innocent"? Would dropping the WMD's deter future aggression?

 

[enhanced_deficit]

bdtf, interesting complicated Qs and reserving the right to get back with more detailed answer but for now I would say that there are bound to be many many innocent people in the civilian populated buildings of a city. To make it simple, children don't pay taxes or enable a regime .. even though many adults would fall in same category too, even if your implied argument is accepted on face value for the sake of an argument.

 

[eduardo89]

No. The attacking of civilians in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, etc were some of the worst war crimes in all of human history.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

bdtf, interesting complicated Qs and reserving the right to get back with more detailed answer but for now I would say that there are bound to be many many innocent people in the civilian populated buildings of a city. To make it simple, children don't pay taxes or enable a regime .. even though many adults would fall in same category too even if your implied argument is accepted on face value for the sake of an argument.

I don't want to be offensive, but I am trying to raise every angle to your question, for the sake of interesting discussion. For the sake of extreme example, what if you're facing a super-villain who is literally seconds away from launching a global nuclear attack that will extinguish all life on the planet, and the villain has fashioned himself armor made out of living children; is the only justifiable option to stand back and watch him launch the attack?

 

[eduardo89]

The use of weapons of mass destruction on populated areas is always immoral. They indiscriminately kill, regardless of whether someone is a lawful combatant or a civilian. There is no way to mitigate collateral damage, which must be done in any military offensive. If you believe in just war theory then you must take into account the effect of your actions on innocents.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

No. The attacking of civilians in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, etc were some of the worst war crimes in all of human history.

Where does the blame lie? Is it all on the individual who pulled the trigger to drop the bomb?

 

[Cabal]

Deliberately and intentionally killing innocent human life is murder. Deliberately and intentionally killing innocent human life en masse is mass murder. Dropping a WMD on a civilian population is both deliberate and intentional.

The mere thought of so many lives being snuffed out in an instant, all at once, is absolutely heartbreaking.

 

[eduardo89]

Where does the blame lie? Is it all on the individual who pulled the trigger to drop the bomb?

The blame rests on those who ordered the attacks, but also on those who followed the orders.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

No, but the apparent justification comes from those that know better instilling fear into their population that is greater than the fear of going to battle, or the patriotic emotion instilled through the propaganda is such that they feel a great euphoria to be the servant to the same.

 

[CPUd]

Not to forget the massive bombing campaigns in the months prior to the U.S. dropping the atomic bombs.

"The table below notes the effect of conventional bombing campaigns on Japanese cities:

City Name	% Area Destroyed
Yokohama	58.0
Tokyo	51.0
Toyama	99.0
Nagoya	40.0
Osaka	35.1
Nishinomiya	11.9
Shimonoseki	37.6
Kure	41.9
Kobe	55.7
Omuta	35.8
Wakayama	50.0
Kawasaki	36.2
Okayama	68.9
Yawata	21.2
Kagoshima	63.4
Amagasaki	18.9
Sasebo	41.4
Moji	23.3
Miyakonojo	26.5
Nobeoka	25.2
Miyazaki	26.1
Ube	20.7
Saga	44.2
Imabari	63.9
Matsuyama	64.0
Fukui	86.0
Tokushima	85.2
Sakai	48.2
Hachioji	65.0
Kumamoto	31.2
Isesaki	56.7
Takamatsu	67.5
Akashi	50.2
Fukuyama	80.9
Aomori	30.0
Okazaki	32.2
Oita	28.2
Hiratsuka	48.4
Tokuyama	48.3
Yokkaichi	33.6
Ujiyamada	41.3
Ogaki	39.5
Gifu	63.6
Shizuoka	66.1
Himeji	49.4
Fukuoka	24.1
Kochi	55.2
Shimizu	42.0
Omura	33.1
Chiba	41.0
Ichinomiya	56.3
Nara	69.3
Tsu	69.3
Kuwana	75.0
Toyohashi	61.9
Numazu	42.3
Choshi	44.2
Kofu	78.6
Utsunomiya	43.7
Mito	68.9
Sendai	21.9
Tsuruga	65.1
Nagaoka	64.9
Hitachi	72.0
Kumagaya	55.1
Hamamatsu	60.3
Maebashi	64.2

The attack on these major cities caused as many as 500,000 Japanese deaths, while displacing as many as 5,000,000."

http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=217

 

[eduardo89]

CPUd, I've been to town in Germany that are as small as 5000 inhabitants that were obliterated during the war. What possible moral justification is there to carpet bomb rural villages?

 

[CPUd]

CPUd, I've been to town in Germany that are as small as 5000 inhabitants that were obliterated during the war. What possible moral justification is there to carpet bomb rural villages?

I'm not sure there is one.


This would have been the guy to ask:

 

[krugminator]

It's likely to be abused, but the answer is a very easy yes. If a foreign government attacks the United States, then any force necessary to eliminate the threat is appropriate.

In the case of Japan they had the option to surrender. There was no major active movement to overthrow the government, so the Japanese adults were not innocent. The Japanese were on the side of Hitler and they committed an act of aggression against the United States.

 

[eduardo89]

It's likely to be abused, but the answer is a very easy yes. If a foreign government attacks the United States, then any force necessary to eliminate the threat is appropriate.

In the case of Japan they had the option to surrender. There was no major active movement to overthrow the government, so the Japanese adults were not innocent. The Japanese were on the side of Hitler and they committed an act of aggression against the United States.

What act of aggression did German civilians in Dresden commit against the US? What crime did the thousands of murdered children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki commit against the US?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Are you defending yourself against aggression? Are the people who are for some reason labeled "civilians" responsible for the aggression? Did the "civilians" elect aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" voluntarily act as informants in support of the aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" provide financial support to the aggressive leaders? Do they pay taxes? If the answers are "yes", then what makes the "civilians" "innocent"? Would dropping the WMD's deter future aggression?

IIRC, Hiroshima and Nagasaki had higher numbers of "elite" members of Japanese society in them, possibly due to the fact that those cities had not been bombed. Don't know that it was factor in the bombing of those cities.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Are there times when dropping WMD on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified

What type of WMDs? Pressure cookers? Anthrax? 5000lb bombs?

 

[krugminator]

What act of aggression did German civilians in Dresden commit against the US? What crime did the thousands of murdered children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki commit against the US?

That's why I said adults, because, to me, killing adults from an enemy government is clear cut. Killing children is a tough moral question.